MPs raised concerns about a lack of government targets for mobile and the prospect of some consumers being left behind, providing for some awkward moments
Confirmation of the Government’s strategic priorities for the sector will have to wait for the new year
On 9 December 2025, the UK Government’s Science, Innovation and Technology Committee held a one-off evidence session questioning Baroness Liz Lloyd (Minister for Digital Economy, DSIT) and colleagues on the future of telecoms and broadband. The cross-party group of MPs, led by Chi Onwurah (Chair, Science, Innovation and Technology Committee), began the non-inquiry session asking after DSIT’s priorities for the sector, with growth, security and to some extent consumer protection (as reflected in recent letters to Ofcom and operators on price rises) the department’s apparent focus. Lloyd subsequently swerved a question on whether the UK has the necessary digital infrastructure to power the Government’s growth agenda, simply stating her belief that the country benchmarks well against relevant comparators. Onwurah requested an update on the delayed Statement of Strategic Priorities (SSP) for telecoms and spectrum, which Lloyd confirmed – with responses to the July 2025 consultation still being reviewed – would not be published this side of Christmas. Kevin Adams (Interim Director, Digital Infrastructure, DSIT) sought to reassure Onwurah that it would be released as early as possible next year, while Lloyd added that significant changes between the draft and final versions would be unlikely.
There is an ambition to improve access to mobile broadband, although DSIT does not have a specific target in mind
Onwurah continued with questions on mobile broadband coverage and customer experience, leading to some awkward exchanges with Lloyd on delivery against the ambitions of the 2023 Wireless Infrastructure Strategy (WIS) and on the availability and potential benefits of standalone 5G (5G SA). Adams stated that there is no specific government target for mobile broadband coverage beyond current levels – and noted the progress of the Shared Rural Network (SRN) – but underlined a desire as well as ongoing work to improve access, highlighting that operator investment would be key in this regard. Onwurah pressed him on the lack of a target, bizarrely suggesting it was something Adams was refusing to tell the committee rather than understanding his answer that it did not exist as far as he was aware. In relation to the 5G SA ambition in the WIS, she urged DSIT to define what it means by “in all populated areas” by 2030, stating that the Public Accounts Committee had already sought clarity on the matter over a year ago. MPs also questioned the Government on the impact of reforms to the Electronic Communications Code, arguing that they have decreased land rents and therefore reduced incentives for landowners to provide access for new mobile sites. Lloyd considered that operators and those providing land should be able to reach a commercial agreement, stating that DSIT had supported conversations between both sides. While she claimed to still be seeing an expansion of coverage, MPs disagreed, stating that consumers are experiencing worsening performance (for example, as a result of the 3G switch-off) and more not-spots.
MPs are concerned that commercial rollouts and Project Gigabit will still leave some households without access to fibre
On fixed broadband, Lloyd outlined her view that Project Gigabit is sufficiently funded (with £1.8bn committed until 2030) and is working well to identify gaps in operators’ deployments, with the aim of being “additive” and avoiding overbuild where there is a business case for commercial network rollout. While she foresaw good momentum for the scheme through the spending review period, MPs expressed concern that some local areas were considerably behind plan and wanted to know what the Government was planning on doing to ensure they do not miss out. With Lloyd only able to speak to the public funding secured to the end of the decade, MPs considered it “ludicrous” that the Government thinks it could then in-fill some constituencies to achieve nationwide gigabit-capable broadband coverage by 2032. The committee also quizzed DSIT on the take-up of fibre services, which Lloyd stated the Government (and industry) would want to be higher; however, she saw her department’s role as supporting availability and outlining the opportunities, rather than pushing adoption. Lloyd noted that some people are fearful and uncertain about technology even if it could be beneficial, for example to “augment connection” between GPs and patients. Ultimately, Adams considered that it is primarily the responsibility of operators to drive fibre adoption, not the state’s.
The committee pressed DSIT on PIA prices despite them sitting with Ofcom to determine
Further questions from the committee posed to DSIT felt as if they were misdirected and instead should have been saved for Ofcom. Specifically, Onwurah stated that she had been written to by altnets about the fact that access to Openreach’s ducts is priced on a per metre basis, which they argue makes rural fibre deployments more expensive than those in urban areas. Fairly, Lloyd underlined that this issue falls within Ofcom’s remit and that it is being considered in the context of the Telecoms Access Review (TAR). Adams added his view that it is “reasonable” to price physical infrastructure access (PIA) by distance, stating that fees are determined according to the cost of Openreach maintaining its network, but that the Government has requested greater transparency on the former incumbent’s calculations via the SSP. Clearly dissatisfied, Onwurah stated that this effectively amounted to a “tax on being rural”. On competition more broadly, Lloyd considered that Ofcom was largely doing a good job and that while the SSP would outline the issues the regulator should bear in mind, Ofcom is best placed to determine what more should be done through evidence-based decisions. Despite the suggestion from MPs that DSIT should look to exercise oversight of the TAR process, the Minister emphasised that Ofcom is the independent regulator and that the market review is its responsibility.
